While the question remains unsettled, 800 audience members at the Creation Museum and hundreds of thousands of online spectators were entertained and intrigued by the back-and-forth from two people representing radically different sides of the issue.

“I don’t see it as a debate to win or lose,” Ham said beforehand. “I don’t believe people should go away saying ‘Bill Nye won’ or ‘Ken Ham won.’ I want to passionately deal with what I believe, and I want Bill Nye to passionately speak on what he believes.”

The genesis of the debate stemmed from a YouTube video of Nye, CEO of the Pasadena-based Planetary Society, blasting creationism a few years ago.

After Nye accepted an invitation from Ham to debate the issue publicly a few weeks ago, anticipation for the debate rang throughout the U.S.

Tom Foreman of CNN moderated the dignified discussion between the two scientists. Ham won an earlier coin toss and presented his five-minute opening statement first.

“I believe science has been hijacked by secularists,” Ham said.

Nye began his opening statements with an anecdote about his bow ties, then claimed that Ham’s story involving the great flood is on “the outside of mainstream science.”

The two men then had 30 minutes to give a presentation that was delivered to the audience, but both men used it to question each other’s stance on the issue.

The great flood that led Noah to build the ark that housed two of every animal — or “Ken Ham’s great flood,” as Nye repeatedly called it — was a major topic.

Nye said that if the flood did occur 4,000 years ago, as Ham suggests, and there are 680 layers of snow ice in the Arctic, as studies show, then there would be 170 winter-summer cycles every year.

Nye also said that trees measured to age 9,500 years also do not align with the theory that the Earth is only 4,000 years old. He ended his counter-rebuttal by looking into the camera and begging for “scientifically literate students in the community for a better tomorrow.”

During Ham’s five-minute counter-rebuttal, Ham pointed out an earlier point that Nye made regarding animal teeth and evolution, and how a lion’s teeth are as sharp as they are because they are meant for meat-eating.

Advertisement

“If it has sharp teeth, it doesn’t mean it’s a meat-eater, it means it has sharp teeth,” Ham said.

Ham talked about experimental and observational approaches to science, drawing on Darwin’s finches for example, which are displayed inside The Creation Museum. However, Ham maintains they evolved from other finches.

“It’s not that the evidences are different,” Ham said. “It’s a battle of the same evidence in regard to the past. That’s really the difference when it comes down to it.”

After the back-and-forth, Foreman then steered the debate toward a question-and-answer session with the audience. The questions were previously submitted on cards.

Samuel Schmidt, a computer science major at the University of Cincinnati, made it clear which side of the debate he was on: He was in the audience wearing a blue lab coat and bow tie, signature to Nye’s usual public attire. He decided to attend the debate since it was a “once-in-a-lifetime opportunity” to see Nye.

“There’s been a lot of talk about how this debate shouldn’t have happened,” Schmidt said. “He put himself out there, so I attended so there’s not a whole audience against him.”

Harry and Joyce Ramsey of Waverly, Ohio, have been members of the museum since before it opened at its present site. They got tickets to the debate at the last minute.

“I’m very interested in it,” Harry said. “I know a lot of people, especially in secular schools, are unified against Ham’s beliefs.”

Joyce said Ham is “very knowledgable” on science.

“His basis is on the word of God,” she said. “Everything he says and believes is based on that.”

Tiffany Zerby of Cincinnati wore a short proclaiming Nye is her “homeboy,” and said he “knocked it out of the park.”

“You can’t argue with putting a question out there then giving a concrete answer,” Zerby said. “There was no deflection, no hesitation.”

Cincinnati resident Richard Rosenberger entered the debate “on the side of the Bible,” and left it that way, he said.

“Once you believe in God’s view, you shouldn’t stray from that,” Rosenberger said. “It’s not a matter of agree or disagree, it’s a matter of different points of view. I understand Nye’s point of view, but it’s not the word or God.”